Summary Background Maintenance monotherapy with the PARP inhibitor olaparib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ...ovarian cancer. We aimed to explore the hypothesis that olaparib is most likely to benefit patients with a BRCA mutation. Methods We present data from the second interim analysis of overall survival and a retrospective, preplanned analysis of data by BRCA mutation status from our randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study that assessed maintenance treatment with olaparib 400 mg twice daily (capsules) versus placebo in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer who had received two or more platinum-based regimens and who had a partial or complete response to their most recent platinum-based regimen. Randomisation was by an interactive voice response system, stratified by time to progression on penultimate platinum-based regimen, response to the most recent platinum-based regimen before randomisation, and ethnic descent. The primary endpoint was PFS, analysed for the overall population and by BRCA status. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00753545. Findings Between Aug 28, 2008, and Feb 9, 2010, 136 patients were assigned to olaparib and 129 to placebo. BRCA status was known for 131 (96%) patients in the olaparib group versus 123 (95%) in the placebo group, of whom 74 (56%) versus 62 (50%) had a deleterious or suspected deleterious germline or tumour BRCA mutation. Of patients with a BRCA mutation, median PFS was significantly longer in the olaparib group than in the placebo group (11·2 months 95% CI 8·3–not calculable vs 4·3 months 3·0–5·4; HR 0·18 0·10–0·31; p<0·0001); similar findings were noted for patients with wild-type BRCA , although the difference between groups was lower (7·4 months 5·5–10·3 vs 5·5 months 3·7–5·6; HR 0·54 0·34–0·85; p=0·0075). At the second interim analysis of overall survival (58% maturity), overall survival did not significantly differ between the groups (HR 0·88 95% CI 0·64–1·21; p=0·44); similar findings were noted for patients with mutated BRCA (HR 0·73 0·45–1·17; p=0·19) and wild-type BRCA (HR 0·99 0·63–1·55; p=0·96). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the olaparib group were fatigue (in ten 7% patients in the olaparib group vs four 3% in the placebo group) and anaemia (seven 5% vs one <1%). Serious adverse events were reported in 25 (18%) patients who received olaparib and 11 (9%) who received placebo. Tolerability was similar in patients with mutated BRCA and the overall population. Interpretation These results support the hypothesis that patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer with a BRCA mutation have the greatest likelihood of benefiting from olaparib treatment. Funding AstraZeneca.
Summary Background In patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer, maintenance monotherapy with the PARP inhibitor olaparib significantly improves progression-free survival ...versus placebo. We assessed the effect of maintenance olaparib on overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer, including those with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations ( BRCA m). Methods In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial involving 82 sites across 16 countries, patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer who had received two or more courses of platinum-based chemotherapy and had responded to their latest regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated sequence to receive oral maintenance olaparib (as capsules; 400 mg twice a day) or a matching placebo by an interactive voice response system. Patients were stratified by ancestry, time to progression on penultimate platinum, and response to most recent platinum. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment by the use of unique identifiers generated during randomisation. The primary endpoint of the trial was progression-free survival. In this updated analysis, we present data for overall survival, a secondary endpoint, from the third data analysis after more than 5 years’ follow-up (intention-to-treat population). We did the updated overall survival analysis, described in this Article at 77% data maturity, using a two-sided α of 0·95%. As the study was not powered to assess overall survival, this analysis should be regarded as descriptive and the p values are nominal. We analysed randomly assigned patients for overall survival and all patients who received at least one dose of treatment for safety. This trial is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00753545. Findings Between Aug 28, 2008, and Feb 9, 2010, 265 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib (n=136) or placebo (n=129). 136 patients had deleterious BRCA m. The data cutoff for this analysis was Sept 30, 2015. An overall survival advantage was seen with maintenance olaparib versus placebo in all patients (hazard ratio HR 0·73 95% CI 0·55–0·96; nominal p=0·025, which did not meet the required threshold for statistical significance p<0·0095; median overall survival was 29·8 months 95% CI 26·9–35·7 for those treated with olaparib vs 27·8 months 24·9–33·7 for those treated with placebo), and in patients with BRCA m (HR 0·62 95% CI 0·41–0·94 nominal p=0·025; 34·9 months 95% CI 29·2–54·6 vs 30·2 months 23·1–40·7). The overall survival data in patients with BRCA wild-type were HR 0·83 (95% CI 0·55–1·24, nominal p=0·37; 24·5 months 19·8–35·0 for those treated with olaparib vs 26·6 months 23·1–32·5 for those treated with placebo). 11 (15%) of 74 patients with BRCA m received maintenance olaparib for 5 years or more. Overall, common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the olaparib and placebo groups were fatigue (11 8% of 136 patients vs four 3% of 128) and anaemia (eight 6% vs one 1%). 30 (22%) of 136 patients in the olaparib group and 11 (9%) of 128 patients in the placebo group reported serious adverse events. In patients treated for 2 years or more, adverse events in the olaparib and placebo groups included low-grade nausea (24 75% of 32 patients vs two 40% of five), fatigue (18 56% of 32 vs two 40% of five), vomiting (12 38% of 32 vs zero), and anaemia (eight 25% of 32 vs one 20% of five); generally, events were initially reported during the first 2 years of treatment. Interpretation Despite not reaching statistical significance, patients with BRCA -mutated platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer receiving olaparib maintenance monotherapy after platinum-based chemotherapy appeared to have longer overall survival, supporting the reported progression-free survival benefit. Clinically useful long-term exposure to olaparib was seen with no new safety signals. Taken together, these data support both the long-term clinical benefit and tolerability of maintenance olaparib in patients with BRCA -mutated platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer. Funding AstraZeneca.
Summary Background Angiogenesis is a target in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Nintedanib, an oral triple angiokinase inhibitor of VEGF receptor, platelet-derived growth factor receptor, and ...fibroblast growth factor receptor, has shown activity in phase 2 trials in this setting. We investigated the combination of nintedanib with standard carboplatin and paclitaxel chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. Methods In this double-blind phase 3 trial, chemotherapy-naive patients (aged 18 years or older) with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) IIB–IV ovarian cancer and upfront debulking surgery were stratified by postoperative resection status, FIGO stage, and planned carboplatin dose. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) via an interactive voice or web-based response system to receive six cycles of carboplatin (AUC 5 mg/mL per min or 6 mg/mL per min) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 ) in addition to either 200 mg of nintedanib (nintedanib group) or placebo (placebo group) twice daily on days 2–21 of every 3-week cycle for up to 120 weeks. Patients, investigators, and independent radiological reviewers were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01015118. Findings Between Dec 9, 2009, and July 27, 2011, 1503 patients were screened and 1366 randomly assigned by nine study groups in 22 countries: 911 to the nintedanib group and 455 to the placebo group. 486 (53%) of 911 patients in the nintedanib group experienced disease progression or death compared with 266 (58%) of 455 in the placebo group. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the nintedanib group than in the placebo group (17·2 months 95% CI 16·6–19·9 vs 16·6 months 13·9–19·1; hazard ratio 0·84 95% CI 0·72–0·98; p=0·024). The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal (diarrhoea: nintedanib group 191 21% of 902 grade 3 and three <1% grade 4 vs placebo group nine 2% of 450 grade 3 only) and haematological (neutropenia: nintedanib group 180 20% grade 3 and 200 (22%) grade 4 vs placebo group 90 20% grade 3 and 72 16% grade 4; thrombocytopenia: 105 12% and 55 6% vs 21 5% and eight 2%; anaemia: 108 12% and 13 1% vs 26 6% and five 1%). Serious adverse events were reported in 376 (42%) of 902 patients in the nintedanib group and 155 (34%) of 450 in the placebo group. 29 (3%) of 902 patients in the nintedanib group experienced serious adverse events associated with death compared with 16 (4%) of 450 in the placebo group, including 12 (1%) in the nintedanib group and six (1%) in the placebo group with a malignant neoplasm progression classified as an adverse event by the investigator. Drug-related adverse events leading to death occurred in three patients in the nintedanib group (one without diagnosis of cause; one due to non-drug-related sepsis associated with drug-related diarrhoea and renal failure; and one due to peritonitis) and in one patient in the placebo group (cause unknown). Interpretation Nintedanib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel is an active first-line treatment that significantly increases progression-free survival for women with advanced ovarian cancer, but is associated with more gastrointestinal adverse events. Future studies should focus on improving patient selection and optimisation of tolerability. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim.
Clinical management of uterine sarcomas Amant, Frédéric, Prof; Coosemans, An, MD; Debiec-Rychter, Maria, Prof ...
The lancet oncology,
12/2009, Letnik:
10, Številka:
12
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Summary Malignant pure mesenchymal uterine tumours encompass endometrial stromal sarcoma (ESS), uterine leiomyosarcoma, and undifferentiated sarcomas. This Review discusses pathology, preoperative ...diagnosis, and standard treatment of uterine leiomyosarcoma and low-grade ESS (distinct from undifferentiated uterine sarcomas), with an emphasis on targeted treatment. We show that several features on ultrasonography and MRI can raise suspicion of a uterine sarcoma; however, there are no pathognomonic features on any imaging technique. For both ESS and uterine leiomyosarcoma, hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, but without lymphadenectomy, is the standard surgical treatment for early stage disease. The clinical benefit of chemotherapy is limited, which underscores the importance of targeted therapy. ESS and uterine leiomyosarcoma are driven by different pathways, resulting in a different clinical behaviour. ESS typically is a hormone-sensitive tumour with indolent growth. Uterine leiomyosarcoma is notorious for its aggressive growth and poor outcome. Individualisation of treatment is mandatory, because randomised trials are almost non-existent. The progesterone and oestrogen receptors are clinically important targets for most primarily advanced or recurrent ESS and a subset of recurrent uterine leiomyosarcomas. Potential future targets and targeted treatments that are under investigation are presented for both entities.
Summary Background Currently, all patients with vulvar cancer with a positive sentinel node undergo inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy, irrespective of the size of sentinel-node metastases. Our study ...aimed to assess the association between size of sentinel-node metastasis and risk of metastases in non-sentinel nodes, and risk of disease-specific survival in early stage vulvar cancer. Methods In the GROningen INternational Study on Sentinel nodes in Vulvar cancer (GROINSS-V), sentinel-node detection was done in patients with T1–T2 (<4 cm) squamous-cell vulvar cancer, followed by inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy if metastatic disease was identified in the sentinel node, either by routine examination or pathological ultrastaging. For the present study, sentinel nodes were independently reviewed by two pathologists. Findings Metastatic disease was identified in one or more sentinel nodes in 135 (33%) of 403 patients, and 115 (85%) of these patients had inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy. The risk of non-sentinel-node metastases was higher when the sentinel node was found to be positive with routine pathology than with ultrastaging (23 of 85 groins vs three of 56 groins, p=0·001). For this study, 723 sentinel nodes in 260 patients (2·8 sentinel nodes per patient) were reviewed. The proportion of patients with non-sentinel-node metastases increased with size of sentinel-node metastasis: one of 24 patients with individual tumour cells had a non-sentinel-node metastasis; two of 19 with metastases 2 mm or smaller; two of 15 with metastases larger than 2 mm to 5 mm; and ten of 21 with metastases larger than 5 mm. Disease-specific survival for patients with sentinel-node metastases larger than 2 mm was lower than for those with sentinel-node metastases 2 mm or smaller (69·5% vs 94·4%, p=0·001). Interpretation Our data show that the risk of non-sentinel-node metastases increases with size of sentinel-node metastasis. No size cutoff seems to exist below which chances of non-sentinel-node metastases are close to zero. Therefore, all patients with sentinel-node metastases should have additional groin treatment. The prognosis for patients with sentinel-node metastasis larger than 2 mm is poor, and novel treatment regimens should be explored for these patients. Funding None.
Summary Background Angiogenesis is a valid target in the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer. Trebananib inhibits the binding of angiopoietins 1 and 2 to the Tie2 receptor, and thereby inhibits ...angiogenesis. We aimed to assess whether the addition of trebananib to single-agent weekly paclitaxel in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer improved progression-free survival. Methods For this randomised, double-blind phase 3 study undertaken between Nov 10, 2010, and Nov 19, 2012, we enrolled women with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer from 32 countries. Patient eligibility criteria included having been treated with three or fewer previous regimens, and a platinum-free interval of less than 12 months. We enrolled patients with a computerised interactive voice response system, and patients were randomly assigned using a permuted block method (block size of four) in a 1:1 ratio to receive weekly intravenous paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 ) plus either weekly masked intravenous placebo or trebananib (15 mg/kg). Patients were stratified on the basis of platinum-free interval (≥0 and ≤6 months vs >6 and ≤12 months), presence or absence of measurable disease, and region (North America, western Europe and Australia, or rest of world). The sponsor, investigators, site staff, and patients were masked to the treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01204749 , and is no longer accruing patients. Findings 919 patients were enrolled, of whom 461 were randomly assigned to the trebananib group and 458 to the placebo group. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the trebananib group than in the placebo group (7·2 months 5·8–7·4 vs 5·4 months 95% CI 4·3–5·5, respectively, hazard ratio 0·66, 95% CI 0·57–0·77, p<0·0001). Incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse events was similar between treatment groups (244 54% of 452 patients in the placebo group vs 258 56% of 461 patients in the trebananib group). Trebananib was associated with more adverse event-related treatment discontinuations than was placebo (77 17% patients vs 27 6%, respectively) and higher incidences of oedema (294 64% patients had any-grade oedema in the trebananib group vs 127 28% patients in the placebo group). Grade 3 or higher adverse events included ascites (34 8% in the placebo group vs 52 11% in the trebananib group), neutropenia (40 9% vs 26 6%), and abdominal pain (21 5% vs 22 5%). We recorded serious adverse events in 125 (28%) patients in the placebo group and 159 (34%) patients in the trebananib group. There was a difference of 2% or less in class-specific adverse events associated with anti-VEGF therapy (hypertension, proteinuria, wound-healing complications, thrombotic events, gastrointestinal perforations), except bleeding, which was more common in the placebo group than in the trebananib group (75 17% vs 46 10%). Interpretation Inhibition of angiopoietins 1 and 2 with trebananib provided a clinically meaningful prolongation in progression-free survival. This non-VEGF anti-angiogenesis option for women with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer should be investigated in other settings and in combination with additional agents. Although oedema was increased, typical anti-VEGF associated adverse events were not prominent. Funding Amgen.